From Simon Jenkins:
"Specialist publications covering the public sector, such as Computer Weekly, Building Design and Public Finance, report a litany of disasters as hapless ministers struggle with the public-private behemoths they have created but which fail to deliver. Jacqui Smith and Alan Johnson have neither the competence nor the courage to end the absurdity of the ID card and NHS computers, both victims of high-pressure consultancy with billions of pounds at stake."
Of course, Mr Jenkins could also have included any number of other useless government databases, most relevant here being ContactPoint, aka The Children's Information Sharing Index.
Am off to have another go at extracting ourselves from the NHS Spine. Apparently a letter is not enough.
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Monday, March 24, 2008
Better Off Without Them?
From the irascible Theodore Dalrymple, we heard that:
"When we were students, a professor of public health once told us that the death rate declined whenever or wherever doctors went on strike. This was an even stronger argument, he implied, than the purely ethical one against doctors resorting to such action, or inaction. No profession should lightly expose its uselessness to the public gaze. "
Could these principles, by any chance, also apply to state education and the teaching profession? Is it just possible that we would be better of without them?
Brian Micklethwait seems to be thinking along these lines:
"I am more than ever convinced that if the entire state education system were to drop dead tomorrow morning, that would be a great improvement for some people immediately, for many people in a few weeks, for most people in a few months, and for almost everyone in a few years. After a decade, the results would be miraculous."
Dr. Dalrymple's other point about trying to avoid exposing the inadequacy of the profession could also easily apply to schools, and would account for the habit of teachers of choosing to blame families rather than taking the rap themselves.
"When we were students, a professor of public health once told us that the death rate declined whenever or wherever doctors went on strike. This was an even stronger argument, he implied, than the purely ethical one against doctors resorting to such action, or inaction. No profession should lightly expose its uselessness to the public gaze. "
Could these principles, by any chance, also apply to state education and the teaching profession? Is it just possible that we would be better of without them?
Brian Micklethwait seems to be thinking along these lines:
"I am more than ever convinced that if the entire state education system were to drop dead tomorrow morning, that would be a great improvement for some people immediately, for many people in a few weeks, for most people in a few months, and for almost everyone in a few years. After a decade, the results would be miraculous."
Dr. Dalrymple's other point about trying to avoid exposing the inadequacy of the profession could also easily apply to schools, and would account for the habit of teachers of choosing to blame families rather than taking the rap themselves.
Best Description of Home Education...
...for quite a while from Greg Millman in The Washington Post. Ok, so he is writing about homeschooling but on this evidence there's little difference.
"I've never heard a home-schooling parent refer to a child as "learning disabled," for instance. There are many kinds of intelligence, but conventional schools usually only focus on one. Take late reading. A conventional school education depends on written textbooks and workbooks and homework, so a child who can't read is unable to learn. But home-schoolers have developed systems and approaches that work with the kind of talent and intelligence a child has. One of our sons didn't read until he was 8 years old. That was no disability, though. He learned from audio tapes and DVDs and from being read to and -- very importantly -- from going outside and looking around. He could spot a deer on a hillside or a bluebird in a tree long before the rest of us. When he finally decided to read, he jumped into "The Chronicles of Narnia" and finished the series within weeks. "I want to read the books before I see the movie," he told us. "
Yup, that's all right on the button, as is the rest of the piece.
We'll be looking out for Greg's book "Homeschooling: A Family's Journey" (Tarcher-Penguin), due out in Auguest
In the meantime, am off to search out the online chat about homeschooling on the Washington Post site today, 1:00pm Eastern Time.
"I've never heard a home-schooling parent refer to a child as "learning disabled," for instance. There are many kinds of intelligence, but conventional schools usually only focus on one. Take late reading. A conventional school education depends on written textbooks and workbooks and homework, so a child who can't read is unable to learn. But home-schoolers have developed systems and approaches that work with the kind of talent and intelligence a child has. One of our sons didn't read until he was 8 years old. That was no disability, though. He learned from audio tapes and DVDs and from being read to and -- very importantly -- from going outside and looking around. He could spot a deer on a hillside or a bluebird in a tree long before the rest of us. When he finally decided to read, he jumped into "The Chronicles of Narnia" and finished the series within weeks. "I want to read the books before I see the movie," he told us. "
Yup, that's all right on the button, as is the rest of the piece.
We'll be looking out for Greg's book "Homeschooling: A Family's Journey" (Tarcher-Penguin), due out in Auguest
In the meantime, am off to search out the online chat about homeschooling on the Washington Post site today, 1:00pm Eastern Time.
Sunday, March 23, 2008
California
I am not at all sure that I have understood the recent California homeschooling ruling. As I currently see it, homeschooling remains a perfectly legal option, you don't have to have teaching credentials, you just have to tell the state what you are actually doing, and not pretend to be using credentialed teachers when you aren't.
That aside, one really does have to take issue with the following from the judge, (and whip your child straight out of state school, if you do believe that there is a chance that it is the case):
“A primary purpose of the educational system is to train school children in good citizenship, patriotism and loyalty to the state and the nation as a means of protecting the public welfare,” the judge wrote, quoting from a 1961 case on a similar issue. "
Justice H. Walter Croskey
Whoa, hold on there pal! I don't want my child patriotic and loyal to anything, let alone the state and nation. I want them to think about whether what they are doing seems good and right. I am not even certain that they should automatically have to protect the public welfare. This really would be up to them, thank you very much.
That aside, one really does have to take issue with the following from the judge, (and whip your child straight out of state school, if you do believe that there is a chance that it is the case):
“A primary purpose of the educational system is to train school children in good citizenship, patriotism and loyalty to the state and the nation as a means of protecting the public welfare,” the judge wrote, quoting from a 1961 case on a similar issue. "
Justice H. Walter Croskey
Whoa, hold on there pal! I don't want my child patriotic and loyal to anything, let alone the state and nation. I want them to think about whether what they are doing seems good and right. I am not even certain that they should automatically have to protect the public welfare. This really would be up to them, thank you very much.
Saturday, March 22, 2008
Home Education in Germany
Aspie Home Education has You Tube story of the Busekros family. It comes to us courtesy of the Christian Broadcasting Network, but this version tallies with other sources.
When last I heard, Melissa, who has now turned 16, has been allowed to return home, but not before the HE community in the UK has been alerted to the plight of other German homeschoolers. Plenty of UK HEors are ready to put up a fight on their behalf .
When last I heard, Melissa, who has now turned 16, has been allowed to return home, but not before the HE community in the UK has been alerted to the plight of other German homeschoolers. Plenty of UK HEors are ready to put up a fight on their behalf .
Thursday, March 20, 2008
School-Induced Problems and a Solution
I suppose one should be grateful that it is actually finally coming to the attention of those who might be able to do something about it, but I still can't help but wonder why on earth it has taken so long for adults to make that link between the emotional well-being of children and their experiences of school. Perhaps the recognition both of the link and the possible problems school can cause has been prompted by the spate of teen suicides and/or by the UN's finding that the UK's children come bottom of the league when it comes to well-being, but my honest reaction is "how could it have taken so long!" Are the reportedly high levels of self-harm, anorexia, aggression and bullying amongst school children really the new problems that the Guardian seems to think they are.
Surely school-inflicted damage is an age-old problem. Within my own experience, there were at least eight severe anorexics out of my year group of approx 120 girls, way back when I was at school. This problem appeared to be largely school-induced as it consistently developed at times when academic pressure was most heavily applied. Of the anorexics I know of now from this group, all have been seriously and permanently damaged by this affliction. None of them can eat adequately even now. They all have digestive problems and other health issues such as osteoporosis. At least one of them is sterile, probably as a result of being permanently underweight.
But it wasn't just anorexia. There were plenty of other pupils who were either near-anorexic, bulimic, smiling depressive, completely flat, clearly clinically depressive or proto-pathological narcissists. Plenty of these individuals continue to struggle with the trauma and the emotional habits that resulted from their school experiences.
At the time, very few adults, be they teachers or parents, appeared to take these problems seriously in the least, or come to that, even bothered to recognise them for what they were in the first place. On the rare occasions when problems did come to light, (usually because a child was underachieving academically), teachers would almost unfailingly blame either the child or the family. The idea that a problem could have been generated by teachers or school life...nah, that just wasn't on. Staff would far rather cover their backs and not look for real causes or seek real solutions.
Of course, it is wise to avoid admitting that problems are likely to be caused by the one-size-fits-huge-numbers problem that afflicts the school system since it is nigh impossible to think of a way of solving it, other than by encouraging the child to leave, and schools don't want to do that in the private system, what with that big, fat cheque being on the line, and there is sod-all point changing schools in the state system, what with that poor child most likely getting out of the frying pan and plopping straight into the fire in one short step. Yep, it's pretty damn difficult to know what to do about it if you're invested the school system, so far easier to get blaming children and parents instead.
But really, is this absense of truth-seeking and problem-solving the best we can manage for our children? Is condemning them to hopeless misery and other pathological behaviours really likely to set them up for creative, exciting, responsible lives?
OK, there is some merit in learning to adapt to strenuous surroundings, but surely it is far better to help our children learn that they should only adapt to an environment or situation if they believe that the adaptation would be beneficial, that the cause is worthy. If you were to be conscripted into an army, life would doubtless be hard, but whether you chose to cope with this should surely depend upon whether you believe the cause worthy or not. You would ask yourself "is it a just war?" If so, you adapt. If not, you subvert. Either way, you live your values. Surely this is what we would want from our children?
It was the case that plenty of girls during my time school did appear to adapt to the regime on some level. But you know what? Most of them knew or at least sensed that they weren't doing it in a good cause and they often developed nasty little emotional and behavioural tics to cope with this dissonance. They became subtle bullies, mini-narcissists, religious nut-jobs, or hard around the edges when their better natures would never have allowed for this. Some of them have yet to get over this. They carry the mal-adaptations with them to this day and they often have no compunction about putting their children through a similar system, which whilst it may have improved over the years, still creates many of the same sorts of difficulties for at least some of the children. For many of the other old girl mal-adaptees, it takes a good many years to recover, to see the world for how it is. At that point, most of them vow never to risk repeating that experience for their children.
I have witnessed quite a number of these renunciations as they actually happened, these moments when people finally achieve clarity about how appallingly useless their teen experience had been. At old-girl functions, I see how gentle probing can unravel a huge web of bitterness and hatred for the oppressive institution. A few years ago, I opened the Sunday Telegraph magazine to read a six page denunciation of my school during the years I was there, and this from many of the girls who had appeared to tolerate it well. My recent school magazine carried a paragraph by the head girl in the year above me who had bullied those around her in the services of the school system she appeared to espouse. She has now finally had the wit and wisdom to see the school for what it was at the time. She denounced it roundly and good for her.
So the moral: It is not a good thing to force yourself or your child to adapt to a set of beliefs for which you cannot see a proper rational argument or explanation. It scrambles ones thinking, leaves one open to doing truly terrible things, prevents one from dreaming big about how to solve problems, causes one to repeat mistakes ad nauseam.
If your child senses that they can learn in ways that better suits their skills and interests and that these methods are not open to them in schools, don't try to browbeat them into thinking that they must forego their beliefs. If your child is unhappy in school, I would really be thinking very hard about this one, particularly in the light of knowing that there can be a MUCH BETTER WAY, a way of providing an education that it is suitable to the age, ability and aptitude of the child. Consider home education.
Surely school-inflicted damage is an age-old problem. Within my own experience, there were at least eight severe anorexics out of my year group of approx 120 girls, way back when I was at school. This problem appeared to be largely school-induced as it consistently developed at times when academic pressure was most heavily applied. Of the anorexics I know of now from this group, all have been seriously and permanently damaged by this affliction. None of them can eat adequately even now. They all have digestive problems and other health issues such as osteoporosis. At least one of them is sterile, probably as a result of being permanently underweight.
But it wasn't just anorexia. There were plenty of other pupils who were either near-anorexic, bulimic, smiling depressive, completely flat, clearly clinically depressive or proto-pathological narcissists. Plenty of these individuals continue to struggle with the trauma and the emotional habits that resulted from their school experiences.
At the time, very few adults, be they teachers or parents, appeared to take these problems seriously in the least, or come to that, even bothered to recognise them for what they were in the first place. On the rare occasions when problems did come to light, (usually because a child was underachieving academically), teachers would almost unfailingly blame either the child or the family. The idea that a problem could have been generated by teachers or school life...nah, that just wasn't on. Staff would far rather cover their backs and not look for real causes or seek real solutions.
Of course, it is wise to avoid admitting that problems are likely to be caused by the one-size-fits-huge-numbers problem that afflicts the school system since it is nigh impossible to think of a way of solving it, other than by encouraging the child to leave, and schools don't want to do that in the private system, what with that big, fat cheque being on the line, and there is sod-all point changing schools in the state system, what with that poor child most likely getting out of the frying pan and plopping straight into the fire in one short step. Yep, it's pretty damn difficult to know what to do about it if you're invested the school system, so far easier to get blaming children and parents instead.
But really, is this absense of truth-seeking and problem-solving the best we can manage for our children? Is condemning them to hopeless misery and other pathological behaviours really likely to set them up for creative, exciting, responsible lives?
OK, there is some merit in learning to adapt to strenuous surroundings, but surely it is far better to help our children learn that they should only adapt to an environment or situation if they believe that the adaptation would be beneficial, that the cause is worthy. If you were to be conscripted into an army, life would doubtless be hard, but whether you chose to cope with this should surely depend upon whether you believe the cause worthy or not. You would ask yourself "is it a just war?" If so, you adapt. If not, you subvert. Either way, you live your values. Surely this is what we would want from our children?
It was the case that plenty of girls during my time school did appear to adapt to the regime on some level. But you know what? Most of them knew or at least sensed that they weren't doing it in a good cause and they often developed nasty little emotional and behavioural tics to cope with this dissonance. They became subtle bullies, mini-narcissists, religious nut-jobs, or hard around the edges when their better natures would never have allowed for this. Some of them have yet to get over this. They carry the mal-adaptations with them to this day and they often have no compunction about putting their children through a similar system, which whilst it may have improved over the years, still creates many of the same sorts of difficulties for at least some of the children. For many of the other old girl mal-adaptees, it takes a good many years to recover, to see the world for how it is. At that point, most of them vow never to risk repeating that experience for their children.
I have witnessed quite a number of these renunciations as they actually happened, these moments when people finally achieve clarity about how appallingly useless their teen experience had been. At old-girl functions, I see how gentle probing can unravel a huge web of bitterness and hatred for the oppressive institution. A few years ago, I opened the Sunday Telegraph magazine to read a six page denunciation of my school during the years I was there, and this from many of the girls who had appeared to tolerate it well. My recent school magazine carried a paragraph by the head girl in the year above me who had bullied those around her in the services of the school system she appeared to espouse. She has now finally had the wit and wisdom to see the school for what it was at the time. She denounced it roundly and good for her.
So the moral: It is not a good thing to force yourself or your child to adapt to a set of beliefs for which you cannot see a proper rational argument or explanation. It scrambles ones thinking, leaves one open to doing truly terrible things, prevents one from dreaming big about how to solve problems, causes one to repeat mistakes ad nauseam.
If your child senses that they can learn in ways that better suits their skills and interests and that these methods are not open to them in schools, don't try to browbeat them into thinking that they must forego their beliefs. If your child is unhappy in school, I would really be thinking very hard about this one, particularly in the light of knowing that there can be a MUCH BETTER WAY, a way of providing an education that it is suitable to the age, ability and aptitude of the child. Consider home education.
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Border and Immigration Education Page Update
OK, so there has been an improvement on yesterday's education page from the Border and Immigration Agency, for which we should doubtless thank the home education community and the internet.
We now read:
"This page explains your children's right to education, and your responsibility to make sure they receive full-time education, usually at school. You must make sure they receive full-time education if they are of compulsory education age.
It is compulsory for children to have full-time education between the ages of five and 16. This is usually at school. A child must start education in the term after he/she turns five, and must continue it until June of the year he/she turns 16. If you have any dependants of compulsory school age, you must make sure they receive full-time education.
The organisation responsible for providing education in your area is the local council. It must make sure all children living in its area receive full-time education, regardless of the child's immigration status. The education must be appropriate to the child's age and abilities and any special education needs he/she has. "
However, I'd still rate that a D and not just for the reason that there is no explicit mention of home education. Local councils are neither the sole providers of education, nor are they ultimately responsible for ensuring that a full-time education is taking place. Under primary legislation, parents are responsible for ensuring that a child is in receipt of an education and local authorities only have a duty to act when it appears that a parent is not making suitable provision.
Yup, it's up to the parents, stupid.
We now read:
"This page explains your children's right to education, and your responsibility to make sure they receive full-time education, usually at school. You must make sure they receive full-time education if they are of compulsory education age.
It is compulsory for children to have full-time education between the ages of five and 16. This is usually at school. A child must start education in the term after he/she turns five, and must continue it until June of the year he/she turns 16. If you have any dependants of compulsory school age, you must make sure they receive full-time education.
The organisation responsible for providing education in your area is the local council. It must make sure all children living in its area receive full-time education, regardless of the child's immigration status. The education must be appropriate to the child's age and abilities and any special education needs he/she has. "
However, I'd still rate that a D and not just for the reason that there is no explicit mention of home education. Local councils are neither the sole providers of education, nor are they ultimately responsible for ensuring that a full-time education is taking place. Under primary legislation, parents are responsible for ensuring that a child is in receipt of an education and local authorities only have a duty to act when it appears that a parent is not making suitable provision.
Yup, it's up to the parents, stupid.
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Outrageous Ignorance or Willful Lying?
...from the Border and Immigration Agency. You decide. Either way, it should erode one's faith in government institutions even further, (if that were possible).
Saturday, March 15, 2008
And Your Point?
...presumably that parents are a feckless lot who simply cannot be trusted to be left alone to get on with it.
OK, I give up. All parents everywhere in the UK must finally agree that the only sensible thing to do is to hand over our children at birth. After all, it's quite clear that the state's care homes and all those state approved foster carers never put a foot wrong.
OK, I give up. All parents everywhere in the UK must finally agree that the only sensible thing to do is to hand over our children at birth. After all, it's quite clear that the state's care homes and all those state approved foster carers never put a foot wrong.
Sunday, March 02, 2008
Some of My Friends
There are at least 6 home educators in this cute You Tube Vid, one of whom I suspect would have thoroughly enjoyed his role, throwing the hero from the train.
Saturday, March 01, 2008
More on Schools and Home Education in Germany
For the latest on truancy rates and primary school results, visit ARCH Blog here and here and then there's Scatty's place for more on what German home educators are being forced to resort to.
Friday, February 29, 2008
Schools and Truth-Seeking Don't Mix
A friend who did a teacher-training course last year told me that plenty of the teachers she spoke to found the recruitment TV ads for teachers shockingly misleading and I've often wondered what would happen if school prospectuses were made to conform to an Advertising Standards code. Yep, I wonder how they'd accurately pitch the following story in amongst all those pretty pictures of teachers swirling in job satisfaction.
On yesterday's BBC Breakfast News, it was reported that approximately 50% of teachers admit to having been bullied by their pupils. This percentage is not repeated in the article here, but whatever the figure, the BBC investigators still assert that incidents are under-reported by heads.
Mick Brookes, the NAHT's general secretary has an explanation:
"I think we're quite right in asserting the under-reporting of these sorts of incidents because it's not the sort of thing that schools, and even teachers, will want to be shouting from the rooftops." "
Too right. It also seems perfectly possible that the same explanation could account for the fact that so many schools claim not to have a significant pupil to pupil bullying problem when this is so clearly not the case.
Hm. Put all that in your prospectus if you can.
On yesterday's BBC Breakfast News, it was reported that approximately 50% of teachers admit to having been bullied by their pupils. This percentage is not repeated in the article here, but whatever the figure, the BBC investigators still assert that incidents are under-reported by heads.
Mick Brookes, the NAHT's general secretary has an explanation:
"I think we're quite right in asserting the under-reporting of these sorts of incidents because it's not the sort of thing that schools, and even teachers, will want to be shouting from the rooftops." "
Too right. It also seems perfectly possible that the same explanation could account for the fact that so many schools claim not to have a significant pupil to pupil bullying problem when this is so clearly not the case.
Hm. Put all that in your prospectus if you can.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
My Pet Hates
OK, I'm feeling a bit tetchy right now. It could be the flu, but I am pretty sure that even if I were in tip-top condition, I would be hoppingly irritated by quite a number of the statements made by local authorites in their responses to the consultation on guidance for home education. It's the potent combination of local authority ignorance, their inability to see how inequitable they would like to be and their inability to think through the consequences that really gets to me.
By way of an example, take this statement from Brighton and Hove:
" What happens if a child wants to go to school but the parent doesn’t want this? Who advocates for the child? Is the parent’s decision overriding? "
Ignorance: most home educated children are absolutely thrilled to be home educating. I personally don't know a single one who isn't. In addition, every home educating parent I know would send their child to school if the child wanted to go. They might do this reluctantly, given what they know about schools, but if the child chose this, they would go with it. I suspect therefore that the problem of a child being kept at home against their will is absolutely MINISCULE. If LA personel actually knew anything about most HE families, they would know this already.
Inability to spot the inequitable nature of their demands: If LA's really feel they must intervene in families to check where are child wants to be educated, will they ensure that children who say they don't want to go to school can be educated at home? No? Then don't demand this of the HE community, because it is clearly hugely inequitable.
Inability to think through the consequences: In setting out to ask all HEKs where they would prefer to be educated, and then presumably determining that a child must be sent to school if he says he would prefer it, LAs would be over-riding the principle of parental responsibility for education. Once that has gone, LAs would become responsible for a child's education, so for example, when a child is failed by school, that family would have a case.
Phew, actually I feel better for getting that off my chest, even if the flu will take a little longer.
By way of an example, take this statement from Brighton and Hove:
" What happens if a child wants to go to school but the parent doesn’t want this? Who advocates for the child? Is the parent’s decision overriding? "
Ignorance: most home educated children are absolutely thrilled to be home educating. I personally don't know a single one who isn't. In addition, every home educating parent I know would send their child to school if the child wanted to go. They might do this reluctantly, given what they know about schools, but if the child chose this, they would go with it. I suspect therefore that the problem of a child being kept at home against their will is absolutely MINISCULE. If LA personel actually knew anything about most HE families, they would know this already.
Inability to spot the inequitable nature of their demands: If LA's really feel they must intervene in families to check where are child wants to be educated, will they ensure that children who say they don't want to go to school can be educated at home? No? Then don't demand this of the HE community, because it is clearly hugely inequitable.
Inability to think through the consequences: In setting out to ask all HEKs where they would prefer to be educated, and then presumably determining that a child must be sent to school if he says he would prefer it, LAs would be over-riding the principle of parental responsibility for education. Once that has gone, LAs would become responsible for a child's education, so for example, when a child is failed by school, that family would have a case.
Phew, actually I feel better for getting that off my chest, even if the flu will take a little longer.
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Will They Ever Learn?
We guessed it was bad, but it's nonetheless still galling to read yet more of the Local Authority responses to the DCSF's Consultation on Elective Home Education Guidelines which are emerging as a result of Freedom of Information requests by a number of home educators to various councils.
The fact that the final version of the Guidelines clearly did not give the LAs the leverage they were asking for, could give us some hope that the message will finally sink in. But just in case it hasn't...
To the any LA despots out there: You might be able to control what school children do to the very nth degree, but this is only because parents have (even if completely unwittingly) given you that responsibility. Don't forget in all your customary wielding of power, that the principle of parental responsibility for the welfare and education of children hasn't gone away. You never ever have a prima facie responsibility to do anything in this area, so butt out and only intervene when you are pretty damn sure you really need to. Most of you don't have enough money to go throwing your weight around doing something so totally unnecessary and so frequently very damaging as to interfere with perfectly well-functioning families, so go find something meaningful to do instead.
You know, the secret to education is to learn something. Perhaps the likes of the Education Welfare officers in Doncaster, Bournemouth, Warwickshire and Cambridgeshire really have seen the light at last, but if this is not the case and we really are right back were we were in 2004, well, you would have to wonder whether they'd have been better off being home educated.
UPDATE: Pete has alerted me to the fact that it can be done!
The fact that the final version of the Guidelines clearly did not give the LAs the leverage they were asking for, could give us some hope that the message will finally sink in. But just in case it hasn't...
To the any LA despots out there: You might be able to control what school children do to the very nth degree, but this is only because parents have (even if completely unwittingly) given you that responsibility. Don't forget in all your customary wielding of power, that the principle of parental responsibility for the welfare and education of children hasn't gone away. You never ever have a prima facie responsibility to do anything in this area, so butt out and only intervene when you are pretty damn sure you really need to. Most of you don't have enough money to go throwing your weight around doing something so totally unnecessary and so frequently very damaging as to interfere with perfectly well-functioning families, so go find something meaningful to do instead.
You know, the secret to education is to learn something. Perhaps the likes of the Education Welfare officers in Doncaster, Bournemouth, Warwickshire and Cambridgeshire really have seen the light at last, but if this is not the case and we really are right back were we were in 2004, well, you would have to wonder whether they'd have been better off being home educated.
UPDATE: Pete has alerted me to the fact that it can be done!
Sunday, February 24, 2008
German Home Educators Flee to UK
...a story from the Guardian which contains a perfectly legitimate reference to Hitler.
Saturday, February 23, 2008
Connexions and Home Education
The home education community has recently been re-alerted to the fact that personal advisors (PAs) from the government's Connexions Careers Advice Service for teens aged 13 - 18 are cold-calling home educating families in what looks like an attempt to conscript HEKs into the system.
This is not innocuous. From the invaluable Database Masterclass:
"Every young person is allocated a ‘personal adviser’ (PA) who brokers access to services, and is responsible for carrying out an in-depth personal assessment of the young person. This assessment process is known as APIR (Assessment, Planning, Implementation and Review) and covers every area of the young person’s life, including information about parents, family and friends. "
Yep, that really means every area of a young person's life: health, income, family relationships, mental health, emotional health, you name it. And guess where all this highly personal information gets stored? Yep, you got it: yet another database, this time the Connexions Customer Information System (CCIS).
It has also emerged that some local authorities have nominated a Connexions worker to actively seek out those teens who are not obviously within the system, so HEKs are very likely to be in their sights.
PAs are meant to garner consent before starting out on this whole redundant yet dangerous process, but once a teen has given that consent, it looks pretty damn difficult to withdraw it, so plenty of HE parents will be making absolutely certain that their teens have imbibed the message that they shouldn't give out personal information to a complete stranger on the doorstep or over the telephone, so they also shouldn't do it simply because someone says they are from the government.
This is not innocuous. From the invaluable Database Masterclass:
"Every young person is allocated a ‘personal adviser’ (PA) who brokers access to services, and is responsible for carrying out an in-depth personal assessment of the young person. This assessment process is known as APIR (Assessment, Planning, Implementation and Review) and covers every area of the young person’s life, including information about parents, family and friends. "
Yep, that really means every area of a young person's life: health, income, family relationships, mental health, emotional health, you name it. And guess where all this highly personal information gets stored? Yep, you got it: yet another database, this time the Connexions Customer Information System (CCIS).
It has also emerged that some local authorities have nominated a Connexions worker to actively seek out those teens who are not obviously within the system, so HEKs are very likely to be in their sights.
PAs are meant to garner consent before starting out on this whole redundant yet dangerous process, but once a teen has given that consent, it looks pretty damn difficult to withdraw it, so plenty of HE parents will be making absolutely certain that their teens have imbibed the message that they shouldn't give out personal information to a complete stranger on the doorstep or over the telephone, so they also shouldn't do it simply because someone says they are from the government.
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Our Space
Talking of finding Orion, here's another project which involves identifying the constellation.
"GLOBE at Night Event Taking Place Feb. 25 - March 8, 2008
Take part in this international event to observe the night time sky and learn more about light pollution around the world. GLOBE at Night is an easy observation and reporting activity that takes approximately 15-30 minutes to complete."
"GLOBE at Night Event Taking Place Feb. 25 - March 8, 2008
Take part in this international event to observe the night time sky and learn more about light pollution around the world. GLOBE at Night is an easy observation and reporting activity that takes approximately 15-30 minutes to complete."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)